musicdude2202 t1_iwmnsl7 wrote
Reply to comment by _drjayphd_ in Republicans' margin in N.H. House shrinks again, after recount flips 2nd seat to Dems by rockonritalin
For which there are exceptions for so what are you crying about with abortion restrictions?
_drjayphd_ t1_iwmoe0w wrote
No crying, I said there shouldn't need to be exceptions because there shouldn't be restrictions in the first place. That ban (which, as we all remember, didn't have those exceptions originally because the Republicans were running such a sloppy shop) only exists to normalize pushing for more restrictions because elective abortions are nearly non-existent that late.
musicdude2202 t1_iwnkiw8 wrote
So why limit it at birth then? Why not have the option to kill your kid until 2 or 5 or hell until they leave your house at 18+? Why even consider murder bad? Just do what you want we need to limit the population anyway.
_drjayphd_ t1_iwnkqj9 wrote
Literally nobody is seriously saying that and you know it, and you know damn well why.
musicdude2202 t1_iwp3t0e wrote
Well clearly I’m using reductio ad absurdum but frankly I don’t see a difference in killing a baby that has just been born and killing one that is mere weeks from birth. It’s infanticide and it’s wrong. Abortion was supposed to be safe legal and RARE, not an alternative to contraception. Sure you can carve out exceptions and rarities and what ifs all day but at the end of it the majority are elective and I believe there should be a limit as to how far into term that should be allowed. +- 12-15 weeks with exceptions for catastrophic rarities like a death potential seems more than fair to me
_drjayphd_ t1_iwpytiz wrote
You did a really terrible job of it, for starters. And the numbers don't back up what you're talking about either. What I was talking about is well beyond any kind of contraceptive use, as the vast majority of abortions after 24 weeks are because of complications. (And notice how we're talking about 24 weeks and now you're moving the goalposts to "oh, I would be okay with 12-15 weeks"? Fuck outta here with that.) I recognize that my view on abortion (no restrictions on elective abortions) isn't exactly shared with everyone here but guess what, yours isn't either and it's not grounded in reality.
Also I'm gonna assume you're going to support legislation to enshrine Griswold v. Connecticut and the subsequent right to contraception before Clarence Thomas isn't just musing about getting rid of that decision too. You can't base your views in "well, it shouldn't be an alternative to contraception..." without protecting access to contraception too.
musicdude2202 t1_iwtk7ce wrote
So emotional lol. Yes you are correct you are an extreme minority believing that elective abortion should have no limits. 12-15 is right on par with the overwhelming majority of the developed western world so I’d say I’m in the supreme majority on that. Yes use of contraceptives should be protected. Preventing pregnancy isn’t the same thing as killing a human being. Your view is radical bud. You won’t get your way
_drjayphd_ t1_iwtlgcn wrote
You ever consider that maybe "the overwhelming majority of the developed Western world" has reasons why it's so short that aren't applicable to the US? Like long established (longer than the US has been a country) intertwining of religion and government? Look at how long it took Ireland to decriminalize abortion because of the overwhelming history of Christian denominations as seats of power. It was only legalized four years ago because of a dentist dying from a miscarriage. That was the impetus to repeal a constitutional amendment that banned abortion in Ireland (which had already been outlawed since 1861 but anti-choice dickheads wanted to lock it in once they saw the tides were turning against them). You have zero perspective and you think you have the high ground. Do yourself a favor and walk away, neither of us are enacting any policy changes, especially not this deep in a thread.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments